Compounded levy abatement upheld where unit closure was established and stock verification evidence was absent.

Abatement under the compounded levy scheme was treated as available where the unit's closure was otherwise established. The factory had stopped production, officers repeatedly found it closed, and the rolling mill was operating on a diesel generator set, so the absence of an electricity meter reading was considered immaterial. Although the assessee did not intimate the closing stock position, the department produced no material showing stock verification during its visits or the presence of excisable goods after closure. The procedural lapse was therefore not enough to displace the factual finding of closure, and an adverse inference was drawn against the department for not producing relevant verification material.

---

---

Issues: Whether abatement under the compounded levy scheme was rightly allowed despite non-furnishing of the closing stock position and electricity meter reading at the time of closure of the unit.

Analysis: The unit had closed production from the stated date and the departmental officers visited the premises on several occasions and found it closed. The rolling mill was found to be running on a diesel generator set, so non-furnishing of the electricity meter reading was held to be of little consequence. Although the assessee did not intimate the closing stock position as required, the department also did not place material to show that the stock position was verified during the visits or that excisable goods were available at the factory after closure. In these circumstances, the omission by the assessee was treated as not sufficient to dislodge the factual finding of closure, and an adverse inference was drawn against the department for withholding relevant verification material.

Conclusion: The abatement allowed from the date found by the Commissioner was upheld; the appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where closure of the unit is otherwise established and the department fails to verify or produce evidence on stock position, a procedural lapse in intimating closing stock does not by itself defeat entitlement to abatement under the compounded levy scheme.

---